Thousands of children every year must enter and exit elementary, junior, and
high schools. They must leave friends, find new ones, enter into extracurricular
activities, and simply try to fit in. Many times we hear horrific stories of gun
and weapon violence and fighting between students in these situations. Why is it
that the ďnew kidĒ is always the one who is violent? They may be unattached from
school activities or have no commitment to any goals. There may be an underlying
issue from becoming predisposed to violence at home. Although mobility and
social capital has been investigated
(Homans,
1961), violence causes
violence regardless of the situation. The compelling questions of why those
children who are newer to the school are more prone to violenct acts have not
been answered.

Findings from a cohort study show that being abused or neglected as a child
increases the risk of violent criminal behavior, but have those children been
attached to the community long? School violence has become a serious problem in
recent decades, especially where weapons such as guns or knives are involved (Widom,
1989). This also includes
violence between school students, as well as physical attacks. A basis can be
built from social disorganization theory which refers to the failure of the
social institution in communities and neighborhoods. However, this theory has
not investigated escalated violence outside of those neighborhoods.

Hirschi's Causes
of Delinquency
(1969)is a benchmark for theory construction and research in the delinquency
field.By using Hirschiís social bonding theory, specifically focusing on
commitment and attachment, I will try to uncover why mobile children start
fights, bring weapons to school, or seem to be isolated or engage in violent
behaviors. I hope to discover if this is because they are experiencing an
unstable home environment where they have to pick up and leave to start a new
life in a foreign area. I will attempt to broaden the horizons of Hirschiís four
elements of the bond by providing answers to why school related violence exists
in communities every year.

BACKGROUND

As noted above, Hirschiís Bonding Theory (1969) has been involved in many
areas of social science study. Most commonly, scientists have used his four
elements of the bond; attachment, involvement, commitment, and belief. In this
theory, Hirchi was striving to provide an explanation for juvenile delinquency.
As he sees it, ďÖthe delinquent person is relatively free of intimate
attachments, the aspirations, and the moral beliefs that bind more people to a
life within the law.Ē (Hirschi, 1969, preface). In his social control theory of
delinquency, Hirschi identifies four elements of the bond, and assumes that if
the individualís bond is broken to society they will result in a delinquent act.
Attachment is explained through means of a psychopath; in other words, the
deficient attachment to or affection of others results in violent acts. Less
attached individuals are free from moral constraints and guilty consciousness.
Commitment is defined through the concept that most people live in organized
society, acquire goods, reputations, and prospects that they do not want to risk
losing (Hirschi,
1969). Thus, the person is
committed to a conventional means of living. Involvement includes the level of
engrossment an individual has towards a conventional activity. The assumption is
that a person may be too busy doing conventional things to find time to engage
in deviance. Finally, belief assumes that there is an existence of a common
value system with the society. It is important to note that with belief, we not
only assume the deviant has believed the rules, we assume he believes the rules
even as he violates them (Hirschi,
1969).

In general, the more closely related a person is to conventional society,
the more closely he will be related in other elements. In research, Hirschiís
theory can be combined into six possible combinations. For purposes of the idea
of escalated violent behavior as a result of frequently changing of schools, the
relationship between attachment and commitment is most prevalent. According to
delinquency research, one of the adolescentís problems is the inability to sever
ties with parents and peers, thus preventing him from engaging in school related
activities and academics (Hirschi,
1969). In relation to Hirschi,
his attachments are getting in the way of his conventional commitments. In
stratification research, the males who break away from these attachments are
more likely to become more mobile thus change homes and schools more frequently.

Theory

According to a model used by Nancy Cunningham,
behavior will be pro-social or antisocial depending on the ďpredominant
behaviors, norms, and values held by those individuals or institutions to
which/whom the individual is bondedĒ (Catalano et al., 2004, p. 252) and
emphasizes the development of pro-social bonding as a protective factor against
harm. Once the bonds are strongly established, they inhibit behavior consistent
with the norms and values of the institution to which they are bonded(Cunningham, 2007).
In this research, Cunningham used two scales of bonding for attachment and
commitment; while attachment consisted of six scale items and commitment
consisted of eight scale items. High scores on the scales were identified as a
higher attachment and commitment to the school. This study relates to mine
because I am also focusing on Hirschiís two elements of attachment and
commitment in relation to school violence.

Behaviors can also vary across cultures. For example, if I was
investigating with a variable for multiple cultures I would be able to apply
Hirschiís theory of social bonding. In a 2007 study by Miyuki Fukushima, Susan
Sharp, and Emiko Kobayashi, there was an investigation of social bonding across
two cultures; American and Japanese. An argument was developed that claimed that
collectivism in Japanese society generates stronger social bonds, than the more
individualistic American society, thus explaining a lower level of deviance in
Japan. This study was conducted using college students on measures of deviance
and social bonds to the school and fellow students. In the end, the results
indicated that Japanese students engaged in significantly less deviance than
Americans (Miyuki
Fukushima, 2009). As stated
above, this does not specifically link with my basis, although it is a more
current evaluation of Hirschiís theory in more than one culture.

Hirschiís social control theory was previously used in a similar way I am
choosing to do. In a study conducted by Michael Wiatrowski, David Griswold, and
Mary Roberts, they formed a basis from Hirschiís social control theory by
proposing that delinquents fail to form or maintain a bond to society consisting
of attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief (Wiatrowski, 1981). By using
data from the Youth in Transition Study, the report developed multivariate
models of social control theory simultaneously with how the four elements of the
bond operate in relation to delinquency. Delinquency was measured using an index
scale of up to twenty-six items adapted from Goldís
(1966)
self-report measure of delinquency. Among the areas of measurement were; theft,
vandalism, interpersonal aggression, delinquency in school, frequency and
seriousness of delinquent behavior, and trouble with parents. These variables
are similar to the index scale of violence I will be using in my own research
study.

It was noted in the aforementioned study that Hirschi does not consider how his
four elements of the bond might act simultaneously in affecting the likelihood
of delinquent behavior. In addition, instead of analyzing relationships among
elements, he instead hypothesizes the relationships between attachment and
commitment, commitment and involvement, and attachment and belief. As a
consequence, this theory creates questions to be answered. First, the extent to
which Hirschiís four elements represent specific components of socialization is
not clear. Second, education and occupational aspirations are discussed within
Hirschiís theory, but he fails to construct figures such as socioeconomic
status. Research has proven that the aspirations of education and occupational
status are important in the development of a complete theory towards attachment
and commitment (Sewell, 1969; Haller, 1973).

Behavior

The relationship between crime and communities has always been a focal
point for sociological investigation. In my research, I am also investigating
the reciprocal relationship between violent crime and residential stability in
neighborhoods. The majority of sociological investigations limit themselves in
the degree of this reciprocal relationship. It has been shown that we need to
understand not only how violent crime impacts neighborhood residential
stability, but how changes in the stability affect crime simultaneously. In a
2010 study, Lyndsay Boggess and John Hipp attempted to test whether the form of
stability matters by comparing two types of stability; traditional and novel.
They also examined whether the racial/ethnic composition of the neighborhood
mattered to the violent crime relationship. After using data from Los Angeles
from 1992 to 1997, their results indicated that violent acts of crime increases
the path towards residential stability (Hipp,
2010). This type of study
would be helpful in my demographic variable testing, thus it could be determined
if mobility affects crime with my age group of adolescents.

Two researchers in 2005 were driven by a concern with adolescent violence
and the growing research on the social factors linked to youth violence. One
risk factor they chose to investigate was residential mobility. Dana Haynie and
Scott South (2005) identified four broad categories of explanatory factors that
have previously invoked theorists on residential mobility and adolescent problem
behavior: parent-child relationships, psychological distress, experiences of
victimization, and peer social networks. Parent-child relationships are a reason
why residential mobility might increase violence because moving negatively
affects parentsí relationships with their children, thus the children are
inadequately supervised and less monitored. As noted, a change of dwelling,
community, or school may cause many connections to be severed in the childís
network, thus resulting in a loss of social capital (Coleman,
1988). In turn, the less
social capital along with residential mobility the adolescentís development is
negatively impacted, which can increase a risk in engaging in violent behavior.
An important variable in finding social capital is the adolescents stable
network structure (Hirschi,
1969). As proven by Travis
Hirschi, when adolescents are firmly connected to family, school, etc. it is
more difficult for them to misbehave.

A second factor is psychological distress. In this approach, it is considered
that the adolescent has been through a substantial amount of confusion in
establishing self-image, finding supporting friends and peers, and beginning
their emotional and psychological formation
(South,
2005). Residential mobility
has been characterized as a stressful life event for adolescents. Psychological
distress might lead adolescents to develop a ďnothing to loseĒ attitude towards
violent activities (Harris,
2002). Victimization may also
be a possible explanation because newcomers sometimes encounter personal attacks
and are more vulnerable. Higher rates of victimization might lead residentially
mobile adolescents to subsequently engage in violent behavior for purposes of
defense, retaliation, or to eradicate strains induced by victimization
(South, 2005).
The final factor in explaining residential mobility on adolescent violence is
the difference between peer social networks of mobile and non-mobile youth.
Mobile youth report having fewer close friends and less personal intimacy with
the friends they do have
(Vernberg,
1990) and they are less likely
to be the center of peer social networks (South
S. J., 2004). In the end,
their findings implied that relatively deviant adolescent school networks may be
particularly welcoming to new members and that once mobile adolescents become
embedded in such network they will tend to adopt the violent behaviors of their
members (South
D. L., 2005). This finding is
the same that I seek to find in my study of school mobility and escalated
violence in adolescents.

Combined
Theory and Behavior

The Council on Alcohol and Drug Abuse took Hirschiís social control
theory and social violence and bundled them into one research study; similar to
my own. It is important to note that this study evaluates the Columbine High
School massacre of 1999. As noted previously, Hirschi
(1969)
identified four elements of the social bond to explain why some juveniles resort
to delinquency. Attachment refers to an individualís sensitivity and empathy for
the feelings of others. School shooters are angry with those who bullied,
belittled, or ostracized them for a period of time leading up to the attack (Vossekuil,
2006). The second element of
commitment pertains to the time and energy one spends pursuing a specific
activity as getting an education or career
(Hirschi,
1969). School shooters do not
anticipate getting away with the crime because the shooter has adopted a kill or
be killed mindset
(Vossekuil,
2006). The third element,
involvement, operates with a premise that a person is engrossed in conventional
social activities that the individual will not have the time or desire to
participate in delinquent acts
(Hirschi,
1969). According to Vossekuil,
Reddy & Fein (2000), more than 50% of the perpetrators developed a plan of
attack at least two weeks prior to the attack. The final element of belief is
defined as an individualís belief in social rules and laws of society (Hirschi,
1969).
Revenge was a large
motive of the school attacks because the perpetrators believed that
retaliation was the only option available to compensate the perceived actions of
other students (Vossekuil,
2006).

Research pertaining to peer harassment, bullying, and victimization has
captured attention of researchers who understand symptoms of and risks
associated with physical and verbal peer aggression. In addition, theories
suggesting residential mobility as an important factor in the aggression have
been investigated. In this study, I plan to extend the existing literature on
social control and mobility in relation to escalated violence in adolescents. I
will be including variables such as parental past issues with the law and an
eight item violence scale. As discussed in previous literature, I will provide
more current information on the issue of escalated teen violence and school
mobility.

METHODSSampleThe data for this study came from a sample of 13,349 students in grades 6th
through 12th in a large public school in the most populous county in
Kentucky (Clayton & Wilcox, 2001). In the spring of 1996, a survey was designed
to question students about a broad array of smoking, drinking, drug-taking, and
other delinquent behaviors. In addition, it measured family background,
attitudes toward school, involvement in school victimization and violence, peer
behavior and religious attitude.It
was administered by teachers across 22 schools in the form of a written
questionnaire and given during one class period for about 45 minutes. Passive
parental consent and Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval had been
obtained; studentís consent was obtained at the time of administration. Of the
13,255 completed surveys from the students of 21 schools, 1,000 cases were
deleted due to missing data on nominal-level measures. In the end, the total
useable sample was 12,343. Yet, because of space constraints presented by the
student version of SPSS a final sample of 1,500 cases was randomly selected. The
sample is relatively unbiased as to socioeconomic demographics. As one would
expect, given the small number of cases lost to missing data, the final
subsample of cases analyzed is similar to the total number of students in grades
6th through 12th surveyed (Clayton & Wilcox, 2011).

Independent Variables

Changing Schools

To assess the frequency of
changing schools, the question asked the number of times the respondent had
changed schools in the last twelve months. The response was open-ended for
respondents to fill in the actual number.

Dependent Variables

Level of Violence

To measure overall level of violence, I developed a scale to measure the
depth of the violent acts. The violence scale consisted of eight items created
into an additive scale and contained a wide range of behaviors from shoving or
tripping someone to using a weapon in a fight. Moreover, respondents were asked
to answer a yes (1) or no (0) to each question. The scaleís range runs from 0 to
8. Zero indicates no violence and 8 represents the most violence

Controls

In order to ensure that any relationship between mobility and the outcome
of escalation in violence were not spurious, I included control variables for
the analysis. Specifically, I controlled for demographic differences across
students that might explain differences, including age, sex, and race. Sex and
race are measured by dichotomous variables (male = 1, female = 0, white = 1,
non-white = 0). Age is measured by a continuous variable of actual age in years.

RESULTS

This study attempted to examine the relationship between the number of times an
adolescent has changed schools in the past twelve months and their level of
violence. I sought to answer questions on why mobile children start fights,
bring weapons to school, or seem to be isolated or engaged in violent behaviors.

Bivariate Analysis

Table 2 illustrates the bivariate relations among the study variables. Of
particular interest is the significance between the number of times changed
schools in the past twelve months and the violence scale. Moreover, significant
relationships were shown between the number of times changed schools and race,
as well as age. Both of these correlations were negatively significant. In fact,
the only variable to not show a significant relationship with the mobility
variable was the sex of the individual.

Multivariate Analysis

To test the effect of the violence scale on the number of times changed schools
in the past twelve months, while controlling for sex, race, and age, I used an
ordinary least squares (OLS) regression model for my outcome variable. As seen
in Table 3, the number of times changed schools in the past twelve months was
significantly related to the individualís level of violence. For every unit
increase in the changing of schools, there is a corresponding increase of .190*
in the adolescentís level of violence, regardless of sex, race, or age. Compared
to females, males score on average 1.555* higher on the violence scale,
regardless of race or age. Compared to non-whites, whites score on average .819*
lower on the violence scale, regardless of sex or age. For every year increase
in age, there is a corresponding increase in a childís level of violence by
.072, regardless of sex or race.

CONCLUSION

As hypothesized, the number of times an adolescent changes homes does in
fact have an effect on their level of violence (See Table 2 and 3). As you many
recall the previous information and data does in fact support this hypothesis.
It is important to note that this study included many strengths, weaknesses, and
limitations.

Strengths

In the methods section, I described the creation of a multivariate scale
to measure the depth of violence acts among the adolescents. The violence scale
consisted of eight items containing behaviors from shoving or tripping to using
a weapon in a fight. By doing so, I created a wider range of a single variable
to investigate against my independent variables, as well as making their level
of violence a more valid measure.

Weaknesses

Due to the fact that this project was based on secondary analysis, I did
not have access to all of the variables that ideally should have been included.
In addition, limitations of my statistical program provided me with a random
sample of 1,500 cases of data; rather than 26,000. Most importantly, this data
is only representative of students in this specific Kentucky school district and
not of the entire state, nor the nation as a whole. To note, the Kentucky school
surveyed was a fairly homogenous state of 87% white citizens.

Directions for Further Research

As a result of the small sample size, further research should seek to
replicate my findings with a much larger sample size. Despite such discussed
limitations, I have provided evidence that the number of times an adolescent
changes homes in the past twelve months is in fact related to a wide range of
violent behaviors. This offers support for Hirschiís social bonding theory
(1969).

WORKS CITED

Catalano, R. F. (2004). The Importance of
Bonding to School for Healthy Development: Findings from the Social
Development Research Group. Journal of School Health, 252-261.

Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social Capital in the
Creation of Human Capital. American Journal of Sociology, S95-S120.

Cunningham, N. (2007). Level of Bonding to
School and Perception of the School Environment by Bullies, Victims, and Bully
Victims. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 457-478.

Vernberg, E. M. (1990). Experiences with Peers
Following Relocation During Early Adolescence. American Journal of
Orthopsychiatry, 466-72.

Vossekuil, B. R. (2006, October 26). An
Interim Report on the Prevention of Targeted Violence in Schools. Retrieved
from United States Secret Service:
http://www.treas.gov/usss/ntac/ssi_interim_report.pdf